Opinions on this 1904 Double Eagle please

[jman425]

 

[PerryHall]

The 1904 is by far the most common date Liberty double eagle. Consider getting a better date. This coin could be anywhere from a 58 to a 62 based on those pics.

[MBA101]

Luster looks somewhat complete, but it is hard to tell the number or severity of hairlines and marks from those pics, so an actual grade is difficult. A guess would be a 62, give or take a point.

 

This coin will always be easy to sell because its gold, but if you are looking to add a little more bang for your buck, I would get a slabbed Lib in MS 63, or a better date (1890, 98, 05, etc) in 61 or 62. They will have some stronger numismatic fluctuations in addition to the gold price rising and you can make some quick bucks on, say, MS 63 bid spikes if you happen to need to sell.

[Lost Dutchman]

I would agree with previous statements. From those pictures the coin looks like a lower end unc. (but maybe AU depending if the luster is broken on the cheek or not) But it is the one that is most often seen.

 

 

[MBA101]

I would agree with previous statements. From those pictures the coin looks like a lower end unc. (but maybe AU depending if the luster is broken on the cheek or not) But it is the one that is most often seen.

 

 

Luster is always broken on the cheek up through MS 63. Even 64's, the cheek luster is slightly impaired. These coins take the bulk of their bagmarks right on the cheek, and having viewed dozens and owning 17 myself, I have never seen complete facial luster except on 65's, and perhaps a 64 or two.

 

That said, when my Dad bought me an 1897 back in 1978, the coin was graded "Choice AU" and has a severe facial laceration breaking the coins great luster. NGC graded it an MS 62.

 

So standards have changed, but the argument can be made that a coin that only saw a bank vault and never circulation can get bagmarked up enough to lose perfect luster. Especially those that had to be loaded on stagecoaches and ships to be sent to banks, such as San Francisco, New Orleans, or Carson City gold.

[James_OldeTowne]

Despite being THE common date, 1904 is my favorite Liberty double-eagle type coin for numismatic purposes. This is the date most frequently seen "prooflike", and like the 1881-S Morgan, is the most likely candidate for PL or DMPL designation. I once owned an example that was as prooflike as it gets, with fully frosted cameo devices and astoundingly deep mirrors, and I got a great premium for it. That has been several years ago, though.

 

To give an analogy, 1904 is to double-eagles what the 1881-S is to Morgan dollars.

 

I wouldn't buy just any old 1904 - hold out for a flashy PL example.

[MBA101]

Whole bunch more like this in the current Heritage sale:

 

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1108&Lot_No=10651

[Lost Dutchman]

I would agree with previous statements. From those pictures the coin looks like a lower end unc. (but maybe AU depending if the luster is broken on the cheek or not) But it is the one that is most often seen.

 

 

Luster is always broken on the cheek up through MS 63. Even 64's, the cheek luster is slightly impaired. These coins take the bulk of their bagmarks right on the cheek, and having viewed dozens and owning 17 myself, I have never seen complete facial luster except on 65's, and perhaps a 64 or two.

 

I was taught to grade gold by an old timer...that might explain it... Everyone always says im too harsh on gold! I like to call it conservative.

[jtryka]

The 1904 in addition to being the most common date is also the most commonly counterfeited. Some of the dots near the lettering raise some concerns if they are raised, as for grade, it seems to me to be AU-maybe MS-61 in my opinion. If you can get it for melt I would probably take a chance on it.